Loading...
05-23-83 agendaz 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 185 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Discussion of Code Enforcement Regulations At the May 9, 1983 city council meeting, Council Member Ludeman raised several questions regarding the code enforce- ment regulations in the city, and requested that this item be scheduled for the May 23, 1983 city council meeting. Discussion of this item has been scheduled for the 5:30 p.m. study session on May 23, 1983, and city staff will be • present to discuss the matter at that time. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA / Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Council Letter No. 184 Agenda May 23, 1983 Subject: Recruitment Process for. City Manager Position At the last city council meeting, the city council dis- cussed some of the advantages and disadvantages of various methods of recruitment for the city manager position. Decision making concerning the method of the process for recruitment was delayed until May 23 in order to allow the Mayor an oppor- tunity to have involvement in the process. However, the council did ask for further information to be provided con- cerning the various alternatives. • Attached to this council letter are some of the documents which were put together in 1979 for the recruitment of city manager. Needless to say, each one of these documents would have to be updated, but they serve as an example of the type of work which was done by the executive recruiter at that time. The first document gives general information about Richfield and its city government, while the second one gives a position description. The third document is the specific specifications put together after discussion with the city council members. The fourth document is the actual application form which gave more detailed information than a resume would relating to the individual. The fifth attachment is an article which appeared in the March, 1983 issue of Public Management magazine concern- r inq the professional process benefiting councils, candidates, and the profession. This article describes the executive search method and its merits. The two options receiving the most discussion by the city council at the May 9 meeting were the use of a council sub- committee or the use of an executive search firm. Some of the advantages and disadvantages for each approach are set out below: A. Council Sub-Committee 0 Advantages Disadvantages - Lower dollar cost to the city - More direct involvement in the process of evaluating all applications High time commitment for: A. setting qualifications; B. reviewing applications. C. checking references: Council Letter No. 184 -2- May 20, 1983 0 Advantages Disadvantages D. narrowing the field of applicants Lack of specific expertise /experience in conducting the search Lack of facilitator/leader to assist the council B. Executive Search Firm Advantages Facilitates/focuses development by council of a recruitment profile of qualifications i Handles all "logistics" iated with the process: A-mailing responses B-handling inquiries C-preliminary screening applicants D-checking references Disadvantages, Higher dollar costs (often 250 of the position salary) plus expenses; assoc- Some influence on how the process is conducted passes from council to the firm - council is not directly a of part of the entire process Enhances the ability of council and candidates to get a better perspective of each other May know of qualified candidates who would not automatically apply for position Firms that are active the executive recruitment are: Loren L. Law and Associates - who has done the last recruit- ment for the City of Richfield, and has a primary focus in the upper Midwest. Paul A. Reaume & Associates - Paul has a primary focus in the upper Midwest also. Korn-Ferry International - Is a nationwide recruitment firm, but has done very little recruitment work in the State of Minnesota. While all council members undoubtedly want to recruit a well qualified manager, who is a good match for the city, indiv- idual styles and interaction may preclude an open and forthright discussion of all the issues associated with the recruitment. Because of the amount of work associated with the process, Council Letter No. 184 -3- some council members will necessarily be more closely involved • than others. It is also important that the staff should have some opportunity to provide input to the organizational aspects of the recruitment profile. The council may want to interview two or three executive search firms and then decide if they want to use one of these or go ahead on their own. The other alternative is for the city council to decide immediately to do the process on their own and schedule an indepth study session to deal with all the various aspects of the process. The advertisement appeared in the May 16 International City Management Association newsletter, so applications are being received at this time. Advertisements in newspapers will commence shortly. I will be happy to discuss this matter in more detail at the study session on May 23, 1983. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger. City Manager KN/eja 0 E 0 FACTS ABOUT RICHFIELD AND ITS CITY GOVERNMENT THE CITY Richfield is primarily a single family residential community with limited multiple residential, industrial and commercial develop- ment. Geographically, the city encompasses seven (7) square miles. Established within the community is a quality public educational school system which includes a senior high school, two junior high schools, and four elementary schools. Richfield's present popula- tion is 42,500. Access to an excellent highway system which surrounds Richfield enables its residents to enjoy the conveniences and privacy of suburban living and yet be only minutes away from most of the cultural and recreational facilities available in the Twin City Metropolitan Area. THE GOVERNMENT Richfield was incorporated as a village in 1908. The residents approved a village manager form of government on November 7, 1950. On November 3, 1964, voters adopted a home rule charter and Rich- field became a city with council-manager government. The city • council consists of a mayor and four council members. The council has the responsibility of making basic policy decisions for the community, including the appointment of a city manager, who has the responsibility of putting council policies into effect and administering the affairs of city government. Since adopting the village manager form of government in 1950, four persons have held this position. The present five member city council has served a total of 48 years. Council members are presently elected at-large. However, an amendment to the city charter adopted last fall provides that beginning in 1981, three of Richfield's five council officials will be elected by district, with the mayor and one council member to continue election at-large. The Richfield city government is organized into nine functional departments: Executive, Environmental Health, Finance, Legal, Park and Recreation, Planning and Redevelopment, Public Safety, Public Works and the Municipal Liquor Stores, with a total of 209 full time employees and a general fund budget for 1979 of $6,313,731. Richfield has just completed a seven year permanent street improve- ment project in which 120 miles of city streets were paved and curb, gutters and ornamental street lighting were installed. The city is presently involved in a multi-million dollar tax increm- ent financing redevelopment project at one of our major shopping center areas. Construction will begin this summer of an 18-hole municipal golf course which will be constructed on 186 acres of land the city has leased from the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Richfield is also involved in a systematic pare improvement program, and is hoping within the next few years to redevelop most of the city's parks. Funds for this purpose are provided primarily from profits of the,three municipal liquor stores and Community Development Block Grant funds. The council members also sit as the Richfield HRA, of which the City Manager serves as Executive Director. In addition to manag- ing the redevelopment project, the HRA administers several housing rehabilitation and assistance programs, including a Section 8 Leased Housing Program. • 0 POSITION DESCRIPTION CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA POSITION: City Manager OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE Plan and direct the administration of city functions as estab- lished by city charter, ordinance, and city council to ensure efficient municipal services and development in line with council objectives. Includes overall responsibility for city finance, treasurer fun- ctions, city clerk, planning, public works operations, public safety, parks and recreation, environmental health, personnel, and liquor stores operation for a city of about 42,500 population in the metropolitan area. Also responsible for advising the council regarding the impact of policy decisions, and representing the interests of the city in metropolitan, state and national activities as delegated by the council. RELATIONSHIPS Reports to: City Council Supervises: Administrative Assistant Director of Finance/City Treasurer/City Clerk Director of Environmental Health Personnel Director Director of Public Works Director of Public Safety Director of Planning and Redevelopment Director of Parks and Recreation Liquor Store Manager Administrative Secretary MAJOR DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 1. Administration - The city manager shall be the chief executive and shall be responsible to the council for the administrative branch of the city government. Subject to the provisions of the city charter and any council regulations consistent there- with, he or she shall control and direct the administration . of the city's affairs. He or she shall exercise control over all departments and divisions of the city administration created by the city charter or by the city council. 2. Personnel Administration - Responsible for all personnel and labor relations functions for the city. Manager plays more of the role in labor relations of administering council policy through the negotiator and being responsible for administra- tion of four labor contracts. 3. Financial Administration - Preparation and control of the city budget is one of the most important functions. Re- sponsible for overall fiscal affairs of the municipality through the finance director. 4. Public Works - Responsible for the administration of munici- pal'services administered by the public works department including streets, water, sewer, building inspection, engin- eering, and equipment maintenance. 5. Public Safety - Responsible for both police and fire protection through the public safety director - coordinates civil defense through public safety department. 6. Planning and Redevelopment - Serves as Executive Director for the HRA in addition to full responsibility for planning through the planning and redevelopment director. 7. Parks and Recreation - Responsible for development and main- taining park and recreation system which includes two major parks; neighborhood parks, ice arena, swimming pool, nature center and community center. Responsible for total recrea- tion programs including senior citizen and handicapped. 8. Environmental Health - Responsible for the health and welfare of Richfield residents through the environmental health director. Also responsible for enforcing ordinances relating to resident- ial and commercial property maintenance and air and noise pollution. 9. Liquor Stores - Responsible for profitable operation of three municipal off-sale liquor stores under the direction of the liquor store manager. 10. Community and Governmental Relations - Represents the city in a number of community and inter-governmental affairs for the city. Work involves relationships with other cities, school districts, county, metro, state and federal government. Public relations responsibility which includes news media and the provision of good public information to people in the community through various communications media. 11. General Facilitator - General responsibility to ensure that the municipal system works well. Includes helping people work together coordinating activities and functions, creating good procedures and processes for exchanging information and reaching decisions, and the ability to be flexible in re- acting to the needs and desires of others. 0 SPECIFICATIONS 0 THE POSITION QUALIFICATIONS City manager reporting to the city council and will be responsible for the administra- tion of municipal government as outlined in the city charter and delegated by the city council. Education: • A Bachelor Degree or equivalent experience. Master of Public Administration desirable, but not essential. Personal: Required is an individual who is analytical, possesses mature judgment, good administra- tor, and socially adaptable and able to exercise initiative, oral and written communi- cative skills, and ability to listen and to communicate with the public, staff and city council. APPROPRIATE Prefer several years combined experience in PREVIOUS city administration as an administrator/manager EXPERIENCE or as an assistant administrator/manager of a larger community or equivalent administrative experience in the private sector. The indiv- idual should have a favorable work record of sound management practices and supervisory experience. The individual should possess a comprehensive knowledge and understanding of all phases of city administration, finance, planning, public safety, public works, redevel- opment, and personnel as they relate to sound management and supervisory practices. COMPENSATION The salary for the position is open and commensurate with the candidate's qualifications and experience. Excellent perquisites are included as a direct financial supplement to base salary. 40 • APPLICATION FOR CITY MANAGER RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Name : . . Phone: Address: (street) (city) (state) (zip) Education and Training History: Formal Education: (check highest level completed) High School Associate Bachelors Masters PhD • (name of institution) (address) (major coursework) (city, state, zip) (other ccursework) Undergraduate Graduate - (check one} (from - to) (degree or certification) 2. (name of institution) (address) (major coursewcrk) (city, state, zip) (other coursework) Undergraduate Graduate _ (check one) (from - to) (degree or certification) 3. (name of institution) (address) (city, state, zip) (major coursewcrk) (other coursework) Undergraduate- Graduate- (check one) (from-to) (degree or cer itication z"_,.. Gc :war- :or a rs or ?_. _ereC - -??or ...a_.,et ever i.. =if _.. Brier "e of 4u ?-es a -,q ._,_....:e, ??c._._ :C:•J:^, e ..G.e ?:c:Cre?s 1::5?le(? . _ i G e -- ? r , S r 7-0 ?reSe 1 P S i r`T . -?:ies ,....u P_es c^s_bilities Surerviscr: r e n -e maae OT y0'..':r :resent e:'1pli-ver 'eC rC?PC ii0 _ f' ,.,bons e:7 _PC e-Lz 7 c ,7L en: _? Vas C =GCr ass . e _ :'_c .. f L e a v ncQ • 0 pG es r c m tG Ca! ar GL St.ver Sor . en-- caress µ. jGC Title: -u:ies and Respcr.siaii.ities. From to Salary e oz Super;iscr: =.ea?o:: or av-Lnc. C a 1 4 7 _, a. • :ease : _ Lea :rinc . T = -'ore aver rec ire _e- s - e .use awe ?cr-a= on Lain atier ) :.e _`GliOvi_iti z:ect ccn?ayns _ien seve-: Krowry e ge , a ac-:e- c,ef_"'.ialo-. s) re iYe _ an-, areas aaS (See cv- -? ? , 't-' - C OL P_° ?C,^.? ?IedSe lisL the '.•IC'?" -e'_enc a-(d ^..r educat' or. and c- u, ?a?ne-? c de•.-eIcpec is erual_` z°c ?ee1 cu • cr?'ec?e c? e?_`ec.na^acem - e^ an,. ?ractices: 0 3. :...ow=e,ige of :aunicJpal covernmen- s -ruc -ure, or; anizat.icn an ser?-i sec . r? L._J • ?-.?=11 ?-: G'e`?°_1CD1^_ ?erLCr:'lanC° cr1-???-__.. • ?.. ?e- _ :over:: ?erscn-e , _.u^.aueme- ? _ es and prac t_ces . is ?lease list three references who would be qualified to comment or. your wer!t experience. No more than one should be a supervisor mentioned in the wort: history section of vcur application. ('T'hey :ji11 -ct tie contacted without your permission.) Address (s%r ee (cI t (stage) z _.'a7.e ( __ r e _; (ci-v) state) (zip) 3. Name: Address: (street) (city) ;state) (zip) • cal _`a cn are _r ue _Cmple to and correct LC of ? -c-.. _eCCe and 'elle- d • -9- i?OWLEDGE 07 IF ICTIVE ? AidAGE _EtIT PRINCIPLES P.?7D PRACTICES : This element is used to assess the a:?olicant's exposure to a :aide range of management theory and practice applicable to the coordination of the activities of the Executive Deo_artrent. It includes the allocation of staff resources, the development of department objectives, the scheduling of priorities, the achievement of speci- fied goals within the budgetary limitations and the coordination of varied activities. SKILL IN DEFINING OBJECTIVES AND STRUCTURING ACTIVITIES TO MEET OBJECTIVES: This element is intended to measure the applicant's ability to develop specific goals and timetables to implement municipal policies as established by ordinances and resolutions. It includes skill in deductively identifying the activities necess- ary to achieve objectives, defining quality and efficiency standards, and coordinating the operations of appropriate municipal departments to achieve end results. KNOWLEDGE OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE, ORGANIZATION AND SERVICES: This element is intended to measure the extent to which the applicant is knowledgeable of the environment in which the selected administrator will function. It includes, but is not restricted to, knowledge of legislative and executive functions and responsibilities, municipal revenue sources, purchasing methods, organization of operational sub-units, distribution of services, applicable federal and state legislation, and government account- ability to citizens. SKILL IN DEVELOPING PERFOP?KANCE CRITERIA: This element is intend- ed to measure the extent to which each applicant possesses the ability to assess operational efficiency in the distribution of municipal services and to develop specific criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of city departments in meeting their respective goals. It requires skill in analyzing statistical reports, estimating unit cost to service ratios, developing systems to coor- dinate activities of diverse operations, consolidating administra- tive functions of activities where horizontal or vertical homo- geneity of operations permit, and evaluating the effective expend- iture of human and financial resources. K?dOWLEDGE OF %1ODERN PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND PRACTICES: This element is intended to measure the applicant's knowledge of the concepts and principles appropriate to the recruitment, appoint- ment, compensation, performance evaluation, discipline and discharge of personnel within the parameters of merit, equal opportunity, efficiency, bilateral Negotiations, and other applicable consider- ations. SfiILL IN COMIMU dICATI"G : This element is intended to measure the extent to which each applicant possesses the ability to organize and present relatively complex material in a clear, concise, authoritative and accurate manner. Of primary consideration is the ability, to keep the Mayor and Council apprised of activities and progress within the Executive Department and all other city departments and to issue operational directions to effect cite policy. Included are the ability to make detailed progress repo . reco7::end ac -ien to reso- . e --L- me - ad cress pu e -= gs a_ the press as i S::Iii :,iiI:. RA T -r, 1 Treasure t^.e app rlicar.t' s ab 1j M'2? =s i-eT.ded to 1e =.i t_,' to assess an` i greeds, de el op accura _ r _ a_ _ e venue estimates , ides o f e z7r t-o ui_es of revenue, allocate reSCUrCeS aCCCrdii`C7 cO ncii pricrit=es, implement and Mal; tain accounting sV•Stems and ,:l_„v.,lish reports OT receipts and expenditures, It includes the ability tc identify, a p1 Pr Y for, and administer federal grants and programs. A Professional Process Benefiting Councils Candidates, and the Profession MUMMOMOWAS? by Paul A. Reaume Paul A. Reaume Associates -P.ARA, Incorporated Chicago, Illinois Local government concerns and urban complexities require the attention of a committed and compatible council-manager team. The wedding of that team together is the ulti- mate goal of the executive search process. Executive search provides a process with spe- cific activities to help a city council or county board select a city manager. City councils and city manager candidates increasingly recognize the important role a responsible and experi- enced executive search firm can serve in providing an open, definable structure to address their interests. The following are the key activities involved in an ex- Position Vacancy Announcement. The position is ecutive search process. These steps help a city coun- listed in the ICV1A Newsletter and is often included in cil find a fully qualified group of candidates from the appropriate municipal league publication and in which to select its next city manager. other professional journals and publications. Al- 0 Development of Qualification Criteria and Position Expectations. This initial step is one of the most im- portant in the recruitment process. Assumptions about the next city manager should be carefully ex- amined. Questions which go beyond the traditional requisites of education and experience need to be raised. By assessing the organization's strengths and weaknesses, the council can better determine the kinds of qualifications and technical expertise it most needs. Specific expectations for the next manager should be defined, outlining problems and identifying major goals for the organization and the community. These criteria should be based on both current and long-range considerations. Some councils make the mistake of concentrating upon only visible and imme- diate needs. Most councils expect the new manager to give at least five years to the job; the criteria should address that time frame. Recruitment profile data are gathered from individ- ual and group interviews with the mayor and city council, key department heads and staff, the outgoing city manager, and other municipal officials or com- munitv leaderE. These interviews capture the unique qualities of the organization and community. Thev address issues and goals, as well as the professional achievement, experience, management style, and per- sonal traits the community feels its manager should have. Attention is given also to the organization and structure of the council to provide data regarding terms of office and expected turnover, and council tatutorv power and roles that may affect the city anager's office. The city council approves the pro- file collectively. The recruitment profile is prepared for distribution to evervone who has expressed an in- terest in the position, to prospective candidates whose interest is solicited by the consultant, and to staff of the municipal organization being served. Public Nlanagement/Nlarch 1983 though the recruitment responsibility of the consul- tant does not rely solely upon receiving applications from such announcements, their publication ensures that all persons from local, regional, and nationally located jurisdictions know of the position and have an opportunity to compete. Similarly, the city enjoys the benefit of broad exposure of their position in the pub- lic management marketplace. Consultant Research and Candidate Solicitation. Armed with the council's specific criteria and expec- tations as outlined in the approved recruitment pro- file, the consultant seeks out individuals who have the specific qualifications the council has identified. The consultant reviews resumes on file, does research, contacts knowledgeable municipal officials, govern- mental organizations, academicians, city managers, and others who might be aware of the talent, achieve- ment, and interests of prospective candidates. Those identified in the initial search effort, generally a rela- tively small number who best ''fit" the profile, are in- vited by the consultant to consider the position. The consultant is careful not to indiscriminately invite large numbers of candidates to apply. Acknowledgment of Applications. This step, which is often overlooked by councils, is important from com- munications, courtesy, and confidentiality stand- points. All applications should be acknowledged. Fur- thermore, whenever an individual is eliminated from consideration, he or she should be notified. It is gen- erally the responsibility of the consultant to receive resumes and handle these communications on behalf of the council, thus affording greater confidentiality. Screening Credentials. In reviewing candidate cre- dentials against the criteria described in the profile, the consultant carefully evaluates background in- formation. It is important for candidates to under- stand that this narrowing-down process requires nu- 13 merous individuals to be eliminated from active consideration, not because they are "unqualified," but because they may not "fit" this particular recruit- ment. Should questions arise in reviewing resumes, the consultant calls for elaboration and/or clarifica- tion. The consultant also contacts appropriate refer- ences, maintaining confidentiality when necessary. This review process normally is conducted jointly by several members of the consultant firm. Generally, a group of approximately 20 individuals who best match the stated desires and expectations of the council are assembled. The consultant may initiate another round of personal and telephone conversa- tions with the candidates or undertake further refer- ence checks if necessary. This narrowing process re- duces the group of candidates to a smaller number who are then personally interviewed by the consul- tant. It is important at this time to secure each candi- date's genuine interest and commitment toward the position-sightseeing trips and "practice interviews" are not in anyone's best interests. Reviewing Candidates for Interviews. A report is prepared for the city council summarizing applica- tions received in the recruitment, and giving specific recommendations and background information on 8 to 10 individuals who are considered to best meet the council's previously established profile criteria. The consultant prepares a brief summary of each candi- date's credentials and reference recommendations and comments. It is important that the original re- sume material submitted by each candidate also is en- closed, ensuring that the council has the opportunity to review and evaluate the originality and resume ap- proach of each candidate. The council is then urged to select at least five from that group for personal in- terviews. This approach allows more professionals to be included in final selection activities, and is de- signed to initiate a council commitment to candidates. Candidates selected for interviews become the "coun- cil's candidates," rather than the "consultant's candi- dates." (This is a variation of the standard consultant practice of directly recommending five or so candi- dates for council interview.) The report to the city council includes other informa- tion important for the council to review at this time: another copy of the recruitment profile to keep the previously agreed-upon qualification criteria clearly in mind during interviews; information regarding current practices concerning salaries, benefits, re- location assistance alternatives, employment agree- ment considerations, ICNIA-RC orientation, as well as a summary of the conditions of employment pertain- ing to the council's last manager (most councils are unaware of these details). All councilmembers should participate in selecting the candidates. Their decisions should be based on consensus rather than a majority vote. Interview Arrangements, The consultant sends pack- ets of information on the city organization, including the charter, budget, land use and street maps, orga- nization chart, special studies, council and staff bio- ;raphical sketches, and other appropriate informa- tion, to all candidates invited for interviews. Materials pertaining to the community at large also are pro- ? ided, for example, church, school, recreation, and housing information. Arrangements are made for the candidates' visits to the city or county for interviews. In most instances, and strongly recommended, interviews of all candi- dates are planned for a compact time period, usually a weekend. This practice best utilizes the time of all participants and shortens the time between inter- views and selection. Candidate Interviews and Council Evaluation of Candidates. A precise schedule is prepared for the weekend interview session. Candidates are scheduled to be hosted on individual tours of municipal facili- ties and community points of interest by a staff mem- ber prior to their interviews. The council is provided an interview guide of suggested questions, based on recruirment profile interviews. These questions are designed to both stimulate open discussion on impor- tanr and crucial issues in the community and forge the eventual council-manager team at this point. Ev- ery attempt is made to candidly get all "issues" on the interview table to avoid or minimize "surprises" at later dates. Each candidate is asked the same cues-, tions to ensure fairness in evaluation. At the point of interview, candidates are well in- formed on the position requirements and existing conditions in the municipality, and councilmembers are well briefed on each candidate. The stage is set for a straightforward, informed interview, with a full exchange of views between the council and the candi- date. The consultant's role at the interview is that of facilitator, not principal participant. When initial interviews with each candidate are com- pleted, the council, with the consultant's assistance when necessary, evaluates the candidates, again us- ing a consensus model as much as possible. Because all candidates are close at hand and available, the council is encouraged to reinterview candidates if ad- ditional information is desired. Through a consensus approach, the group of candidates is narrowed to the two or three most acceptable to the council, with one finalist's being selected as the primary candidate to whom an offer of the position is made, ideally before the close of the weekend. If acceptable to both the council and the candidate, the consultant often assists the two parties in arriving at an acceptable employ- ment agreement and strongly recommends that the appointment be a unanimous action by the council. Final Background Inquiries and Appointment Con- firmation. Early background inquiries may not have involved the candidate's current council or' staff be- cause of a request to preserve confidentiality. Should certain matters arise during final interviews which evoke the council's interest in specific areas of a can- didate's background, final appointment is offered conti.ngenr on the candidate's being subjected to a fi- nal, thorough background investigation. This activity usually is undertaken by the consultant: however, some councils wish to be personally involved in this final phase of the executive search process. From the recruitment profile interviews to the appointment of a manager, the executive search process usually takes 75 to 90 days. With all parties conscientiously assuming and carry- ing out their particular roles and responsibilities in the executive search process, a successful appoint- ment and tenure of council-manager interaction and achievement can be accomplished. Conscientious at- tention, careful and sensitive evaluation, detailed de- liberation, and determined decision-making by all, blended together in such an executive search process as outlined here, will prove to serve the council and candidates well. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 183 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Approval of Plans and Specifications for 1983 Alley Paving Project - C.P. 786 The city council has previously approved the concrete paving of the following 12 alleys: Alley Between From To Garfield and Lyndale Avenues 68th Street 69th Street Garfield and Lyndale Avenue 72nd Street 73rd Street . Grand and Harriet Avenue Thomas and Upton Avenue 68th 66th Street Street 69th 67th Street Street Vincent and Upton Avenue 66th Street 67th Street Vincent and Upton Avenue 69th Street 70th Street Nicollet and First Avenue 72nd Street 73rd Street Upton and Thomas Avenue 69th Street 70th Street 62nd and 63rd Street 15th Avenue Bloomington Ave. Sheridan and Thomas Avenue 69th Street 70th Street Nicollet and Blaisdell Avenue 74th Street 75th Street Thomas and Sheridan Avenue 68th Street 69th Street The city engineer has prepared plans and specifications for these alleys in accordance with council action. The standard 11 foot concrete alley cross-section will be installed. The plans and specifications for the 1983 alley paving project are very similar to those of last year. Asphalt will be placed be- tween garages and the concrete alley where the garages are less than three feet from the concrete alley. If the garages are more than three feet away, sod will be installed. This year, it is estimated that 30 working days will be needed to accomplish all the work. This should allow the contractor sufficient time to complete the work, while requiring him to stay on the job and follow-up each phase of the construction immediately after the pre- vious phase. • It had originally been planned to bid the sidewalk and alleys as one project. However, the city engineer has determined that it Council Letter No. 183 -2- May 23, 1933 • will be more advantageous to bid them as separate projects. Since the sidewalk project is more than 20% assessable, it can be bid separately. The bid opening dates and contract award dates will coincide for both projects. It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution, approving the plans and specifications and ordering the placement of an advertisement for bids. The bid opening is scheduled for June 22, 1983, with council award of the contract scheduled for June 27, 1983. The anticipated start of construction is the second week of July. Respectfully submitted, ?L KI?:,t. i\41 \? Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja 0 10 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR C.P. 786 - 1983 ALLEY PAVING WHEREAS, pursuant to resolutions passed by the city council, the city engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the improvement of the following alleys by reconstruction and concrete paving: Alley Between From To Garfield Ave. and Lyndale Ave. 68th Street 69th Street Garfield Ave. and Lyndale Ave. 72nd Street 73rd Street Grand Ave. and Harriet Ave. 68th Street 69th Street Thomas Ave. and Upton Ave. 66th Street 67th Street Vincent Ave. and Upton Ave. 66th Street 67th Street Vincent Ave. and Upton Ave. 69th Street 70th Street Nicollet Ave. and First Ave. 72nd Street 73rd Street Upton Ave. and Thomas Ave. 69th Street 70th Street 62nd Street and 63rd Street 15th Avenue Bloomington Ave. Sheridan Ave. and Thomas Ave. 69th Street 70th Street Nicollet Ave. and Blaisdell Ave. 74th Street 75th Street Thomas Ave. and Sheridan Ave. 68th Street 69th Street 1 And has presented such plans and s pecificat ions to the council for approval; NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. Such plans and specifications are hereby approved; 2. The city clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and The Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published June 1, 1983, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be received by the clerk until 11:30 A.M. on June 22, 1983, at which time they will be publically opened in the council chambers of the city hall by the city clerk and engineer, will then be tabulated, and will be considered by the council at 7:00 P.M. on June 27, 1983, in the council chambers and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, casiher's check, bid bond or certified • check payable to the clerk for five percent of the amount of such bid. -2- • Adopted by the council this 23rd day of May, 1983. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk • ID 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 182 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Request for Fremont Park Playground Program • At the April 25, 1983 city council meeting, residents of the Fremont Park neighborhood appeared before the council re- questing a summer playground program at Fremont Park. At the council's request, the staff provided background information regarding the summer playground, specifically as it relates to Fremont Park, at the May 9, 1983 city council meeting. The city council subsequently requested that the Community Services Advisory Commission consider this matter and it was presented to the Commission at its regular meeting of-May 10, 1983. Richfield continues to offer an outstanding summer play- ground program. However, this program, as with others, has had to be evaluated through the development of the overall city budget. As previously indicated to the city council, the adopted budget provides funding for the operation of playground programs on a set schedule at various parks and does not include funding for adding playground sites. Therefore, any revision to the summer playground program will require certain budget revisions. In regard to the issue of providing a playground program at Fremont Park, several alternatives are available for consid- eration. The following list has been prepared by the staff and is presented in a descending order of recommendation: Alternatives 1. No change in summer playground program - no program offered at Fremont and other playground sites would remain as scheduled. Effect on Budget No change 2. Divide an existing full time play- Increase by $300 ground to provide two half-time playground sites (i.e. make Donald- son Park a half-day program instead 0 of full day, and add a half-day program at Fremont Park). Council Letter No. 182 -2- Alternative May 23, 1983 Effect on Budget • 3. Provide a half day program at Fremont Increase by $2000 Park in addition to the existing pro- gram sites. • 4. Provide a half-day playground program Increase by $2,900 at Fremont Park and an additional half- day program at another park such as Washington Park, Rich Acres, or Nicollet Park. 5. Provide a full day playground program Increase by $5,200 at Fremont Park and a full day play- ground program at an eastern park area. 6. Provide a full day playground program Increase by $2,600 at Fremont Park with other playground sites remaining scheduled as is. At the Community Services Advisory Commission meeting, residents of the Fremont Park neighborhood were present and participated in the discussion. After discussion, the commission took action to recommend to the city council a full day playground program at Fremont Park. The motion to do so resulted in a 4-4 vote, with the chairman voting in favor to carry the motion 5-4. It was noted by staff at the meeting that consideration of this matter by the city council was scheduled to occur at the May 23, 1983 city council meeting. It was also noted by staff that at the time the commission recommendation was presented to the city council, the city staff would in all likelihood be making a diff- erent recommendation inasmuch as the staff believed the addition of a full day program at Fremont Park only would result in an inequitable overall city program. The staff believes that the summer playground program was given full consideration in the 1983 budget process, particularly with regard to the various trade-offs among park sites and other program offerings. It is, therefore, recommended that the city council make no change in the summer playground program and that the request for a playground program at Fremont Park be consid- ered during the 1984 budget process along with the programs offered at other park locations. However, in the event the council wishes to take action to provide a summer playground program at Fremont Park, the staff recommends that an existing full day playground site be divided by making the full day program to be offered at Donaldson Park made a half-day program, and that a half-day program be offered at Fremont Park. Re pectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberuer City Manager KN/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 181 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: 1983 Jobs Bill Appropriation to the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program The Jobs Bill of 1983 provided for an additional appro- priation to the Community Development Block Grant Program, principally for the creation and direct support of jobs. Urban Hennepin County has received an additional allocation of $1,051,000 under the Jobs Bill, which must be scheduled for use by July 1, 198:3 and fully expended by September 1, 1985. Un- like the regular Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program, the additional appropriation will not be alloca- ted to individual communities for planning purposes. Rather, the entire amount of $1,051,000 will be available to any sub- grantee upon request. This is consistent with the Jobs Bill special emphasis on the expeditious creation of job opportun- ities and the tight timeframe for initiation and completion of activities. For the purposes of planning and programming the use of these additional funds, a special AdHoc Citizen Advisory Committee has been established by the county to serve the citizen partici- pation process. The committee draws its membership from the four planning area citizen advisory committees established for similar purposes for the regular Hennepin County Community De- velopment Block Grant Program. The committee will determine the objectives for the use of the Jobs Bill appropriations, develop criteria for the evaluation of funding proposals, re- view submitted proposals and make funding recommencations to the county board fcr approval. The committee will also review project progress and program amendments as they may arise. In programming the use of these additional funds, HUD re- quires that Urban Hennepin County establish a set of objectives to guide the selection of activities to be funded with the appropriation. These objectives must reflect the intent of both the Jobs Bill and the Housing and Community Development • Act of 1974, as amended. Two sets of general objectives are therefore applicable. The first set is trom the Community Council Letter No. 181 -2- Development Block Grant program. Projects Should: May 23, 1983 1. Principally benefit low and moderate income persons; 2. Aid in the prevention or elimination of slums and blights; 3. Meet other community development needs having a particular urgency. The second set of objectives is from the Jobs Bill. Projects Should: 1. Provide productive employment for jobless Americans; 2. Hasten or initiate federally funded projects or con- struction; 3. Provide humanitarian assistance to the indigent. Proposals for the use of the additional allocation must be consistent with at least one of the generally applicable ob- jectives from each set. The Jobs Bill strongly emphasizes . funding of activities which would create and directly support jobs. This, therefore, is the primary objective of Urban Hennepin County in programming the use of these funds. In addition, HUD particularly emphasizes the funding of community development activities of the following nature as consistent with the purposes of the bill: 1. Public works and facilities; 2. Financial assistance to private businesses for economic development; 3. Housing rehabilitation; 4. Public services. In order for the county to meet the July 1 application deadline, the county has developed a schedule which requires communities to submit their requests for additional funding from the Jobs Bill appropriation to the county by June 7, 1983. These funding requests will then be reviewed by the Ad Hoc Citizens Advisory Committee and then their recommendation would be for- warded to the county board for their action at the end of June. The city staff is developing proposals for submission of requests to Hennepin County for an additional $450,000 from the Jobs Bill appropriation. These proposals will be presented on Monday evening at the council meeting. It may be necessary to Council Letter No. 181 -3- schedule a special council meeting on June 1 to finalize these proposals in conjunction with the annual meeting of the Board of Review. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberaer City Manager KN/eja ?J r? J 0 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Council Letter No. 180 Agenda May 23, 1983 Subject: City position on Proposed Hennepin County Legislation for a Shade Tree Disease Con- trol Funding Program Enclosed with this council letter is correspondence re- cently received from Hennepin County Commissioner Mark Andrew regarding a proposal for a countywide shade tree disease con- trol funding program. The proposal is now in the discussion stage, And Commissioner Andrew is seeking comment on the idea from Hennepin County communities. It is expected that a county staff report on this proposal will be made to the County Board on May 24 or June 7, 1983. While the details of the program have not been worked out, the idea is to use a special county levy of up to $7 million (one mill) to fund a program of matching grants to cities during 1984. The program could pay up to 50% of local costs for dis- eased tree sanitation and reforestation, however, the exact amount would likely depend on the number of cities participating and their actual costs. If less than 50%, the grants would likely be proportioned to cities on an equal percentage basis. The city staff has reviewed this matter and while the avail- ability of outside funds initially seems appealing, we have cer- tain important concerns. First is evaluating the tax trade-offs of city vs. county funding. Based on the 1982 assessed values used for 1983 property taxes, a one mill county levy cost Rich- field taxpayers about $234,000. If 50% of the 1983 forestry budget was eligible for the grant funding, that would amount to about $68,000. So the taxpayers would pay nearly four times the amount returned to the city if such a program had been in effect this year. Secondly, Richfield and certain other pursued shade tree disease control despite • funding during the last two years, while o It is not known if the grant program would for this continuing commitment on the part cities have agressively the lack of state ther cities have not. give any credit of the city. Council Letter No. 180 -2- May 18, 1923 • While Richfield might benefit indirectly from enhanced diseased tree control in some outlying cities and from employ- ment provided by increased funding, it does not appear that these would outweigh the significant disadvantages outlined above. It is, therefore, recommended that the city council take a position of opposing the program as currently proposed, and that the city staff communicate this position to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/ej a 0 0 MARK ANDREW PHONE COMMISSIONER ti41''r O0 348-3080 t t'Uti ESQ BOARD OF HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2400 GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55487 May 4, 1983 Mr. Karl Nollenberger, City Manager 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Mr. Nollenberger: I recently introduced the enclosed resolution concerning a new County-wide shade tree disease control program to the Hennepin County Board. The proposal is being examined by County staff, and my office is gathering input from Hennepin County municipalities, citizens' groups, and State government administrators, who were involved in the original State program. As we set about the task of defining the program and gathering support for it, I want you to know how interested I am in your suggestions. I expect the County Board will hold a hearing on this matter in its Public Service Committee at the end of May, and hopefully we will vote on the program shortly thereafter. In effect, this program would continue on a County-wide basis what the State Shade Tree Program did before its funding was cut--provide matching grants to participating municipalities for sanitation and reforestation programs. It would greatly aid in the passing of this resolution if your City Council would respond, in writing, with its support and suggestions prior to [vlay 15. If you would like additional information or have any questions regarding the intent or content of the resolution, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time. I look forward to working with you Best regards, !dark Andrew Hennepin County Commissioner .%9A:amb:kn Enc. PS. I would appreciate your bringing this matter to the attention of your City Council as soon as possible. RESOLUTION 111D. 83-4-240 R1 The following resolution was offered by Commissioner Mark Andrew. 0 WHaREAS the citizens of Hennepin County are facing a crisis in shade tree losses resulting from dutch elm and oak wilt disease, and TA=-S a substantial percentage of our urban stock of shade trees i-n Heurmepin County muiicipali ties has been lost, and WHEREAS these debilitating diseases threaten to eliminate as much as 900 of all elm and oak tree popu_1ations by 1990 unless adequate safeguards are reestablished to control them, and WAS it is possible to slaw the rate of loss of shade trees in Hennepin County to 5% per year, and WTHU?EAS the State of Minnesota has totally eliminated state matching funds to participating municipalities in 1982, and 'A=U AS this program was proven to be highly effective and economical in controlling the spread of shade tree diseases, and WHEREAS in addition to this epidemic of dutch elm disease in our cCRTM- riities which threatens the quality and vitality of our neighborhoods, there is a corresponding need for new jcbs for the unemployed, and 6vAS a comprehensive county-wide shade tree disease control program 0 in conjunction with participating municipalities will create new jobs, and vht--ZAS these new jobs fit ideally into the State Jobs and General Assistarce proposal d`7veloped and supported by Hennepin County and currently being considered by the :tnnesota Legislature, and ;\TE=-S these new jobs will decrease our dependence upon welfare and increase our ccmui-L=.t to new jobs, SRI-7MRE BE IT RESOLVED that Henrepan County does :.ereby authorize the establishment of a comprehensive shade tree disease control program ror Hennepin County by adopting at least the following reasures: 1. A special leVY on all oroperty in Hennepin County, the proceeds of which shall be placed in a special fund administered by the Hennepin Coi my Depa-r--rrpnt of En=cnrmnt and Energy; 2. A program where proceeds generated will be used to provide 50/50 matching grants to participatL a rmmicipalities for sanitation and reforestation services; • -1- 3. The establishment of an accelerated diseased wood destruction and disposal program; 4. Any other additional measures, such as public awareness, addi- tional training of tree inspectors, agreements to subsidize private property owners for tree removal, and appointment of an advisory committee to advise the County on the abatement to the greatest extent possible of the spread of shade tree diseases in Hennepin County. ARE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Hennepin County staff, using this resolution as an outline, prepare a final resolution for pre- sentation before the Hennepin County Board at its next scheduled meeting. The question was on the adoption of the resolution, and there were YEAS and NAYS, as follows: COUN'T'Y OF HENNEPIN BOARD OF COUNTY COIVVISSIONERS YEA NAY OAR Jeff Spartz Randy Johnson Richard E. Kremer E.F. Robb, Jr. Sam S. Sivanich Mark Andrew John E. Derus, Chai nnan ATTEST: Clerk of the County Board rI -2- .? / :3 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 179 Agenda May 23, 1933 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Approval of Traffic Signal Agreement Between The City of Richfield and Kentucky Fried Chicken National Management Company As part of the negotiations with Kentucky Fried Chicken on the relocation of their Lyndale Avenue restaurant to the old Clark Oil site, the city agrees to allow the installation of a traffic signal when appropriate traffic volumes are met. Attached is a copy of an agreement between the City of Richfield and KFC • which covers the potential installation of a traffic signal at 66th Street and the recently vacated Pillsbury Avenue intersection. This agreement specifically delineates what traffic volumes must be met prior to the time that a traffic signal can be in- stalled at this location. Part of the agreement indicates that the city will check traffic volumes at the city's expense during the months of May and November. The agreement also indicates that if KFC wants volumes checked at other times, the city will do so at KFC's expense. The later counts will not take place dur- ing periods of abnormally high traffic such as the Christmas shopping season. Unless Hennepin County is willing to pay for part of the system, the full cost of the system will be paid for by KFC. Once the system is installed it shall belong to Hennepin County and KFC will not have any obligation toward the maintenance of it. It is recommended that the city council approve the attached agreement, and authorize the city manager to execute the agreement. 4 v Respectfully submitted, e 'JyQ ?? --`` II ff :rte Karl Nollenberger • '. City Manager ? ? ut KN/ej a cc: Community Development Director City Engineer . • TRAFFIC SIGNAL AGREE.`?LENT THIS AGREEMENT, By and between THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, Minnesota, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation ("City") and KFC NATIONAL MANAGEMENT COMPANY, a Delaware corporation ("KFC"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, City has entered into, contemporaneously herewith, a Purchase Agreement to sell a certain parcel of property, located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of 66th Street (Hennepin County Road No. 53) and vacated Pillsbury Avenue, to KFC, and upon which KFC intends to construct one of its stores, and WHEREAS, KFC requires that, for marketing reasons, the purchase of the property by it must.be conditioned upon the install- ation of a traffic signal system at said intersection at such time as the traffic volumes warrant the same, and WHEREAS, the City and KFC have agreed to cooperate in requesting Hennepin County to install said traffic signal system when said traffic volumes warrant the same, and WHEREAS, the parties have reached the agreement herein- after set forth as to said traffic volumes, NOW, THEREFORE, In consideration of the covenants herein- after set forth and the agreement of the parties to enter into the Purchase Agreement referred to above, they do hereby agree as follows: • thereof, after the same is installed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement this day of 11 1983. THE CITY OF RICHFIELD By Its KFC NATIONAL MANAGEMENT COMPANY By Its • r? L _I_ _;tt 6 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 178 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Public Hearing, Addition of Four Alleys to 1983 Paving Project A public hearing has been scheduled for the May 23, 1983 city council meeting to consider the concrete paving of four additional alleys as part of C.P. 786• Alley Between From To 62nd Street and 63rd Street 15th Avenue Bloomington Ave. • Sheridan Avenue and Thomas Ave. 69th Street 70th Street Nicollet Avenue & Blaisdell Ave. 74th Street 75th Street Thomas Avenue and Sheridan Ave. 68th Street 69th Street It is feasible to add these alleys to the 1983 alley paving project. The estimated residential assessment is $19.75 per abutting foot, resulting in an estimate of $987.50 for a typical 50 foot lot. At the close of the public hearing, it is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution ordering the pro- ject. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING THE PAVING OF FOUR ADDITIONAL ALLEYS AND PREPARATION OF PLANS C.P. 786 WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council fixed a date for a council hearing on the pr oposed improvement of the following alley: Alley Between From To 62nd Street and 63rd Street 15th Avenue Bloomington Ave. Sheridan Avenue and Thomas Ave. 69th Street 70th Street Nicollet Ave. and Blaisdell Ave. 74th Street 75th Street Thomas Avenue and Sheridan Ave. 68th Street 69th Street AND WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice of the hearing and two weekly publications of the required notice was given as required by law, and the hearing was held thereon on the 23rd day of May, 1983, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon, NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the council of the City of . Richfield, Minnesota: 1. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the council resolution adopted the 9th day of May, 1983. 2. Michael J. Eastling, City Engineer, is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. Adopted by the council of the City of Richfield this 23rd day of May, 1983. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: • Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager _?4Z / 74 Council Letter No. 177 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Purchase in Excess of $2,650 0 Last year a residential structure at 7434 Fourth Avenue was extensively damaged by fire. The structure cannot be re- paired and the property owners have not proceeded with the demolition of the remains. Therefore, the public safety depart- ment has taken the necessary action to condemn this property as a safety hazard and has solicited informal bids from five demol- ition companies to remove the remains of the structure. Two quotations have been received for this work. Karl Bolander and Son's quoted $2,700 and Ray Anderson and Son's Company quoted $3,150. It is the recommendation of the public safety department, in which I concur, that the demolition contract be awarded to Karl Bolander and Son's in the amount of $2,700. The charge for this demolition work will be assessed against the property with the costs fully recovered by the city. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja cc: Public Safety Director 0 -4?4 7 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 176 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Hearing on Appeal of Denial for Itinerate Food Sales License - Fabian Seafoods On March 29, 1983, Mr. Steve Fabian of Galveston, Texas, submitted an application for an itinerate food sales license. Mr. Fabian is proposing to sell, from his truck, fresh shrimp transported into the City of Richfield from the Galveston, Texas area. Mr. Fabian is proposing to set up his food sales operation in the parking lot of Richfield Automotive, 6545 Nicollet Avenue. i The public safety department and the Bloomington health de- partment have attempted to develop a mutually satisfactory pro- gram with Mr. Fabian for the inspection of the food products he proposes to sell in the community. The city has been unsuccess- ful in this effort. Therefore, on April 28, 1983, the public safety director denied the license for which Mr. Fabian applied. Mr. Fabian has informed us he wishes to appeal this denial to the Richfield City Council under the terms of Richfield City Ordin- ance Code. The requested hearing on this appeal has been scheduled for the regular city council meeting on May 23, 1983. At that time the public safety department will provide testimony in behalf of the denial of this license application. The applicant has been informed of his right to legal counsel at this hearing and will be present to provide information to the city council in support of his appeal in the matter. It is recommended that the city council hold the public hearing as scheduled and consider action concerning the appeal. Respectfully submitted, j -'L - , N_ • Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja C? GEORGE C. HOFF TED A. ALLEN REBECCA A. JOIKE STEVAN S. VASGUR or COUNGEL GEORGE A. KURTZ May 20, 1983 LAW OFFICES HOFF & ALLEN, P.A. 150 SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK BUILDING 300 PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE. MINNESOTA 55344 - 5381 Mayor John Hamilton CITY OF RICHFIELD 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Re: License Application of Steve Fabian Dear Mayor Hamilton: TELEPHONC 941-9220 AREA COOc 612 This letter and the enclosed material is being hand delivered to you so that you may have an opportunity to consider it prior to the City Council Meeting on Monday, May 23rd. Our office represents Steve Fabian, who has for the past five years sold fresh shrimp in the City of Richfield, generally at the Hub Shopping Center. The operation has been a clean, successful and properly licensed operation. This year, unfortunately, the City Administration saw fit to deny Mr. Fabian's license, resulting in our appeal of that decision to you as the City Council. You will find enclosed with this letter, a letter which our office has written to Clayton LeFevere, your City Attorney, outlining the legal reasons why the denial of the license by the City is incorrect, and copies of representative correspondence received by Mr. Fabian concerning his seafood operation, along with a newspaper article showing the success of his service and the quality provided his customers. We are hopeful that the City Council, after reviewing the enclosed materials, will allow Mr. Fabian to continue on the same basis as he has in the past, his operation which is well liked and well run. If any of you have any questions which I may answer concerning this, please feel free to contact me. Si 1] George C. Hoff HOFF & ALLEN, P.A. GCH:baj Mr. Clayton LeFevere May 20, 1983 I* Page Two (2) Richfield City Code. Mr. Fabian has been granted a license to sell fresh shrimp by the City since 1978. The license in 1982, attached as Exhibit A, was entitled Itinerant Food License; in prior years it was simply entitled a license to "sell fresh shrimp." Itinerant food licenses are presently issued under Section 601, along with other food licenses. Section 601 pre-empts all other provisions of the Richfield City Code which may be adopted by reference regarding the same subject matter. Richfield City Code, Section 601, Subdivision 1. Thus, even if there was an attempt by Richfield (which, based upon our review, there has not been) to adopt by reference any other city's regulations, they would be ineffective vis-a-vis Section 601, thus, making that the governing section (subject to limiting arguments below) for food merchants. Section 601, Subdivision 17 deals with itinerant food merchants. That provides that a sanitarian shall immediately inspect and issue a report on itinerant food establishments about to commence operation. Under Subdivisions 11 and 14, the sanitarian can tag, seize and condemn unwholesome food. (Subdivision 5 exempts itinerant food establishments from a food license requirement, thus, no license is required other than the itinerant inspection under Subdivision 17.) Thus, Section 601 contains all of Richfield's legal requirements in regard to itinerant food licensing. That is, inspection before commencement of operations, a report to be immediately issued, no sale of unwholesome food, and the operation is subject to closure and seizure if food is found to be unwholesome upon later checking. Nowhere is there a requirement that there be a five-day frozen storage (quarantine) period, that he contract with a private lab or any of the other requirements Richfield is seeking to impose. Furthermore, there has been no change in the Richfield City Code, Section 601, since the 1982 license was issued. Given no change in the governing regulations and no change in the circumstances of sale, denial of the license is at least inconsistent and can be more rightfully labelled as arbitrary and capricious. (3) Bloomington City Code. It has been suggested that, because of a contract with Bloomington to provide Health Department services, the Bloomington ordinances are in effect in Richfield. Except for very limited circumstances (eg. Subdivision Regulations pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 462.358) a municipal corporation cannot enforce its regulations outside of its corporate boundaries. However, assuming for the moment that 0 Mr. Clayton LeFevere May 20, 1983 • Page Four subdivision of state government, except for licensing requirements which may be imposed by the municipal corporation or subdivision of state government in which the manufacturer, processor or distributor locates a plant. As Exhibit B to this letter shows, Mr. Fabian holds a license as a distributor from the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. Under the statute quoted above, the City of Richfield cannot impose its licensing requirements on Mr. Fabian's business. Even though under state law Mr. Fabian is exempt from City licensing requirements, he does share the City's concern for assuring that the public is provided with wholesome, unadulterated food products. Submitted to yourself and the City are just a few of the letters which Mr. Fabian has received in support of his continued operation in the City. It is obvious, that he runs a clean well thought of and highly popular commercial operation. He has not had complaints lodged against him for any reason, particuarily that of the wholesomeness or freshness of his shrimp. Because Mr. Fabian is confident in his operation, he has not objected to either the state's or the City's reasonable license and inspection requirements; and has never objected to periodic inspections by City authorities to assure that in fact his food remains wholesome and unadulterated throughout the period of sale. However, the license requirements sought to be imposed by the City are unreasonable in view of the service provided, Mr. Fabian' s "track record` in providing good quality service and food to the area, and because there is no legal basis allowing the City to impose such a regulation. Therefore, we respectfully request that the City of Richfield reverse its position and immediately issue to Mr. Fabian an itinerant food license as has been done in past years; or more properly, determine that no such license is required but that his operation is subject to periodic inspection. I would appreciate hearing your views on the foregoing prior to the Council Meeting on the 23rd in the hope that this matter may be resolved. obviously, my client will suffer a loss of business if there is a continuing denial of his legal rights in which event he will of course have to consider what other legal avenues are oper. to him to compensate for the loss. Sincerely, HOFF 2: P. A. Geo gee C. Hoff GCH: c jm Enclosures 0 ) 0) 0) ' W W N ? V V O s' p u a lid v 6epJ tau a Wac u r ??+ .? li w p V V UJ h< r r Ar. ?•c « L = W ./ 00 i a i eQ H t w .r 1? Q. uj J Wjt J V i ttt t ~ Z y r r Y. j W W Z ? r W I z N ?p u Z ^ IY Oft W ` rl V ?. J Q lrOA.?a WCL 1 e~ p. N V) X-w ma r^ :en G v Q L7` i 1 1 ? Q s Q ? y? j {,P 1 Q nQ u Q4 ...1 to u WN V N V N U V ou Q ti u o °L u '? ua = U. V 02 r A v i J a ti tiJ ve i W .• 1 W WN W r" •+ ,N N r •r ? ? = N M ?.? w W Ua u /` W 1tr 1 "a W W wfift -6 0 up w w wo Wl ?r 0 H A A x i P 0- J ^ a = o r.7 i u .r v IA. ?u.? •?+v W W e(v ue- ^ u y u.+ ? O 4..1 1f1 u. o M =a ,A. W.rc i a W uj 16. 0- N X W Q s ?u 1.. W u.? JP 4" r r r.+ w i w a+ N a tD N r = L ?L vl w L W r s M W •u s 1 s 'r u 41 W 1. O v? O o: O 0 O 0 0 0 1 O 0 0 0 t N • W 1 O ~ 1 u r W V r W Gt??:2 7, /fp3 A..) Z;.:,dJ C>d fAaAsA4 74 1 7r.,; oplfo,or • el a? 9 67 C m a .. C '? m ? v 6? ? ` V ? e0 c. m O. C .y. L L ?`` ?. t t- loft w= m `? u Z C o ;; i Qa tG oz v :J v c E E ? E w m 3 ?' a 6i ° C CL 3 - L to o Y en v o y v as ? O y y v? .= d.C .". d s w .2 Lu v r W o Y+ t u yT .r .. tr •= as 3 13 S V ° tom' ?+ ?fi' « w -? L O E .W W v 7 C ?.r Oy ?dy ?,y Lf.? y y ®?w L Epo'u c.C°a??--" EO?46 0 ??y cmE'wy?o?no'E U L cs r L4 M r7 .O !b S'. m L Y .+ V" d ?' `" .r U L" 4 go S2 QJ V C O asr .? '? CO III ° c0 w F O m L t ru c4 = + • S m ?t?_ wy C Y G C 6i C y 4 ed O vi v« a Up 2" Q1 C a° C • C i L O O m m is po .? d O E c9 •' cD Q, 0`? O . .•. > w ^ V1 C!' s = G! Z O '? it qq + O C v C y ?' .7'. L9 r -a 1: wl a 0. L? Y C r C Iii! ..» C S« C. . -°-° ?y= E e ILI ?, c E v g c aav3i? .° •, en 03 AS ra a:. a u. Y r fA ¦1 C S O w Q+ v C Y v ae n, 5' .+ C6,0 4b ti O V 49 0 g .1 :1 1 O y G t g u Y s ° fs ?u • t7f r' Y? v p+0 ? _' a Y d yS ? T3' ??? ? Y? O 7 Y g 3 a C ?_ Y y u u V a tj s 10? i? 3 Y m .. i {? iC a? £. 0 r ?+ C O Q O t 7 C a e w y v Mr a6 ... ad -. Z C ; G O X • '' v ? ,n C ? y Lr " ? s F' ? ' O ? 1 e ? ? }ys ? V ? ? O C 'C u '? v .5E a 4 = ?+? ms oN TO E? ce°? 5e $. o `o o°?? °1s ;Nb ... ?' E D. 3 V w u w w w - c- v a, s ytf 0 c It v M C T y L y i. E L ?, L ?I ev yS ?' L.' u C° t .. C) t t y C O M¦l L E ,o ; a - ? .n :o v o s, ? ?, •v c E-? > o v o >. - cE ?0 O+ N C ?: .... O .- : b d O y v O i doc. L:,°o?oc ..? ya;EE R1 cc 2' v a 'b E G „ v n.. y rU. :3 ?- /• iJa ° .O .r y Q L 6J C U w C S O C O O \/ S O w _ v 67 GI V, G° 3 uJ o o LUG o t 6J w J C7 .'O W 4J 6J VI r S 4! 6J 7 p+ `" L >+ u?ovso o,;e???„? 3.E•?,ay?o??c Q.vo?-°??mw??°v°.oa E 2. c Pr- t 'a 18' to, w C Q m w- w_ L v ro a.o v° v ?' C v u C3 C v a, C7 a c ?e a E v E a a v -? c o S, o ,. t ° R U s v y L E to s ti F' p U L ?, OJ L is i. E° L ?? c9 C V, = 3 O E_ U _caa,m ° -'? y,F 3 c ?; ? w a,? s Q o c a 3 ?v °-'? As `? yt? v L ".rv, aVJ? d ?? r.. C ?' u. C ? f7 •9 1? d ?• ? ,,,. L, `• i ? CO 6J y? c4 .+ V• T \ VI C G ?+ W rL+- u ." O C u L s y Ci ?. r '- =F y OJ V O V> y S 3 :: L a, .?. L O O m' C :. u w 5 C. of C! c ro u, 'U v C Q M.Or^•SiaLc EsQ,,?cc+vs.????„Lao^tD2 v„tco :7L a'Ow OJLS Wr G'J' 3° ?`Cw7 3 60m .. cu ... •-- 61 C. • 7539 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 May 18, 1983 TO: RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL RE: Fabian Seafood We understand that Fabian Seafood has been denied a license to sell fresh shrimp from their truck in Richfield. This is a request to grant an exception to the ordinance and allow Fabian to continue tc sell shrimp in our City. We have been purchasing fresh shrimp from Fabian for a number of years. The quality of the product has been excellent and for those of us who live in the Midwest but thoroughly enjoy fresh shrimp, Fabian has provided us the opportunity to enjoy many excellent meals of fresh shrimp. • We must admit we do wonder why, after five years of Fabian selling shrimp in Richfield, there is now a problem. Why are we allowing the Bloomington Health Department to enforce a Bloomington ordinance in Richfield? It seems obvious that Fabian comes back to Richfield year after year because they have many pleased customers - customers who enjoy the fresh shrimp that is available. Why are you in the process of depriving us shrimp lovers from an excellent source of fresh shrimp? We respectfully request that Fabian be granted a license to sell shrimp in Richfield. Sincerely, Edith Donovan Teresa Goetz 9 • • C ;? ? ??- GC's C ?? / ???V? ,vim" 'J F-? • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 175 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Ordinance Amendment Relating to On-Sale Wine License Year As members of the council may be aware, the City of Rich- field issues three types of licenses for the sale and dispensing of intoxicating liquors and non-intoxicating malt liquors (beer, wine and intoxicating liquor licenses). As a matter of conven- ience, the licensing period of the wine license was set to commence on April 1st of each year, expiring on March 31st the following year. An amendment to Minnesota State Statute 340.11 • subd. 16 requires that: "All intoxicating liquor licenses issued by a munici- pality other than a city of the first class, except manufacturers and wholesalers licenses, shall expire on the same date." This change in the state statute requires that we amend our wine licensing ordinance to bring the licensing period into con- formance with the calendar year. The city attorney's office has developed the attached amendment which will allow us to accomplish this change without affecting the licenses which have currently been issued. In effect, the licenses issued for 1984 will be issued for a nine month period. Starting in1985, all wine licenses will be issued for a calendar year, in a manner similar to the presently existing license periods for non-intoxicating and intoxicating liquor sales. It is the recommendation of the Public Safety Director, in which I concur, that the city council amend the present on-sale wine license to reflect the proposed changes in the licensing period. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja • AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER XI, SECTION 11.08 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter XI, Section 11.08 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield entitled "ON-SALE WINE" is amended by amending subdivision 9 thereof to read as follows: Subd. 9. License Year. The license year shall commence January 1 Apr11-1 of each year beginning in 1985 and terminate on December-31 Hareh-31 of the-ellebalr:g each year beginning in 1985. New licenses issued in 1983 and 1984 shall be on a calendar year basis. Renewal licenses issued in 1984 shall expire on December 31, 1984. When an original license is issued for a portion of the license year, the fee shall be prorated at the rate of one-twelfth of the annual license fee per month or portion of a month remaining in the license year The same proration shall a ply to renewal licenses issued in 1984. • Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of 1983. John E. Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Svlvia K. Bergh, Ciry Clerk 0 # 79 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 174 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council ., City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Report for the Advisory Board of Health on The Recommended Social Service Component of The 1983 Community Development Block Grant Program On February 28, 1983, the Richfield City Council requested that the Richfield Advisory Board of Health develop a priority listing of human service needs in the community based on the 34 specific needs identified for Richfield as a part of the South- Hennepin Human Service Council Needs Assessment Study. This needs assessment study report was originally submitted to the city council on December 13, 1982. As a part of this process, the council asked the Advisory Board of Health to also consider an additional proposal for a Community Jobs Program which had been submitted for council consideration by Mr. John G. Steger. The Advisory Board of Health has completed their consid- eration, including the proposal by Mr. Steger, of the human ser- vice needs programs for our community. Public discussion of this issue was conducted at two advisory board meetings with a formal public hearing on April 18, 1983. As a result of considerable deliberation, and public input with regard to this matter, the Advisory Board of Health has identified five basic human services for the City of Richfield. A copy of the report related to this study is attached for council consideration. Basically, the five needs in their priori- tized order, are as follows: 1. Child/daycare service 2. In-home services to elderly and disabled 3. Family violence services 4. Access to social services and social service program information 5. Chemical dependency and prevention programming 41 In the opinion of the Advisory Board of Health, the most important area for council consideration in Community Development Council Letter No. 174 -2- • Block Grant funding relates community. The second most tified as a need relates to disabled. Considered to be immediate importance were•t areas noted above. May 23, 1983 to child/daycare programs in our important item which has been iden- in-home services to the elderly and of equal concern, but of lesser ze remaining three social service The Chairperson of the Advisory Board of Health, Ms. Lia Ozols, will be present at the May 23rd meeting of the city council to present this report and to respond to any questions which council members may have with regard to this matter. If the city council adopts the funding areas proposed by the Advisory Board of Health, it is recommended that groups interested in applying for funding submit specific program proposals to the Community Development Department no later than June 10, 1983. The Community Development Department will then review these prop- osals for compliance with both federal and county guidelines which regulate the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds. It is expected that the city council could then consider the funding requests at the regularly scheduled council meeting on June 27, 1983. The city council should be aware of concerns recently ex- pressed by the Planning Area One Citizen Advisory Committee about funding public service programs (the committee has review and approval authority for CDBG budget proposals). While the committee indicated conditional approval of the city's plan to allocate ten percent of the budget to public service programs, it warned that the programs must meet all CDBG eligibility requirements to qualify. The city staff has previously expressed concern about a city commitment to fund on-going public service programs. If deemed warranted, specific recommendations in this regard will be made at the time individual requests for funding are consider- ed by the council. Respectfully submitted, KN/eja Karl Nollenberger City Manager 0 • C7 April 25, 1983 Mr. Karl Nollenberg City Manager Richfield City Hall 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Karl, Sue Sarver 7345 Wentworth Richfield, MN Avenue South 55423 The enclosed proposal is for your consideration in the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds towards establishing a child care sliding fee program in Richfield. This proposal has the following changes from what was presented to the Richfield Advisory Board of Health. The reasons for these changes are that the Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association would like to establish one set of guidelines for the entire suburban area - the reasoning is obvious - there would be the potential of having over 40 different suburban child care sliding fee programs. (Naturally if the City should want to adminster its` own sliding fee program it has that right.) 1) Raise the minimum income guideline from 60% of the State Median Income to 70% of the State Median Income. The reasoning being that the Minnesota State Sliding Fee Program now covers this area. 2) Lower the maximum to Median Income to the VIII Guidelines. under 100% of the State maximum of the Section I will plan on attending the City Council meeting when this proposal will be reviewed, along with members of the Richfield Fun Club and Woodlake Child Care Center. I would appreciate it if you would inform me when this will be on the Councils agenda. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Work - 927-7663 Home - 869-0114. Sincerely yours, • Sue Sarver CC: Mr. John Hamilton City Council Members E -2- Richfield City Council Each year in Richfield there are approximately 370 children born, per Mr. Bob Nelson. The breakdown of children in the public schools: 1982/1983 School Year Kindergarten 376 1st Grade 367 2nd Grade 383 3rd Grade 378 4th Grade 337 1,841 0 - 4 years 1,680 (Approximately) 3,521 Approximate total children • LICENSED CHILD CARE AVAILABLE IN RICHFIELD Family or Group Day Care 60 licensed providers care for 300 Children Approx. Woodlake Children Center (Age 2-1/2 - 5 years) 80 Licensed Capacity Richfield Fun Club (School Age only) 40 Licensed Capacity 420 Licensed "slots" The COST of licensed care in Richfield Area Infant (0 to 16 months) Toddler (16 months to 2-1/2 Years) Pre-School (2-1/2 Years - 5 years) School Age (5 Years - 12 Years) $50.00 - 90.00 per week $2,500 - 4,500 per year $50.00 - 65.00 per week $2,500 - 3,250 per year $45.00 - 55.00 per week $2,250 - 2,750 per year School year - $35.00 - 45.00 per week Summer - $50.00 - 55.00 per week 0 • -4- Richfield City Council Richfield dollars would go only to Richfield residents, with a small percentage limited by Hennepin County CDBG regulations, going to cover Greater Minneapolis Day Care Associations minor additional administrative expenses. Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association has been administering such funds for 8 years, and its system is audited both by HUD and the State of Minnesota. RICHFIELD PARENTS ASSISTANCE FUND To be funded through the Community Development Block Grant funds. To subsidize a portion of the child care costs. The guidelines for eligibility: The parent must be utilizing a licensed or otherwise legal fornof child care. The parent (or each parent, if there are two) must be engaged for a minimum of 20 hours a week in active employment, in job-related training, or in a combination of the two. The parent or parents must live in the city of Richfield. And the gross income of the family must fall between 70Z of the State Median Income (adjusted to family size) as the mimimum, and the Section VIII metropolitan guidelines as the maximum. The range of these eligibility guidelines for each family size is as follows: FAMILY SIZE YEARLY GROSS INCOME 2 $12,088 - 17,400 3 14,932 - 19,550 17,776 - 21,750 5 20,620 - 23,100 Etc. As this is a sliding scale program, the lower the family's relative income, the smaller the fee that must be paid for child care, and, conversely, the higher the income on this scale, the closer the family's financial share comes to paying the full cost of care. (however, full cost is paid only when a family's income reaches 100% of the State Median Income, and that is well beyond the maximum in each of these ranges, except perhaps for the figures pertaining to a family of 2.) Sliding fee child care subsidies are NOT income maintance or a welfare program. They provide the necessary support for parents to find and maintain employment. Unlike other forms of subsidy, they do not penalize working parents who receive a raise. Fees are simply adjusted according to increasing income. Child Care Sliding Fee Programs encourage upward mobility and both personal and community-wide economic development. • 11 Rick Jopke -2- Many senior residents in the communities we serve have found the H.O.M.E. Program very important in enabling them to maintain their property and continue to live independently in their community. An additional benefit of this program is a potential cost savings to the taxpayer by delaying placement of the elderly in nursing homes and other subsidized living arrangements. I thank you for your support during 1982 and hope you can find it possible to assist the H.O.M.E. Program in continuing to make this much needed service available to the residents of the City of Richfield. If you have any questions regarding this request, please let me know. Sincerely, Debbra Determan Program Director DD/jmd • On February 28, 1983, the Richfield City Council requested the Richfield Advisory Board of Health to develop a prioritazation of Human Service needs in the community based on the South Hennepin Human Services Needs Assessment Study that was submitted to the Council by the Richfield Advisory Board of Health on December_13, 40 1982. The Richfield Advisory Board of Health presents FIVE primary needs in the community for consideration in the allocation of funds from the Community Development Block Grant Program. i -1- The Richfield Advisory Board of Health is pleased to be a part of the important planning and decision making of our community human service needs. Since the human service needs are an on-going process and the priorities may change, Therefore, We identified and submit 5 primary needs at this time and ask the Richfield City Council to consider the allocation of funds from the Community Development Block Grant Program ($28,800) towards the identified needs in this report. Respectfully Submitted, Lia Ozols, M.T. Chair-Richfield Advisory Board of Health 0 May 23, 1983 0 LO/bac -2- • 0 The Richfield Advisory Board of Health review and prioritazation of the original South Hennepin Human Services recommendations submitted to the City Council on December 13, 1982. Advisory Board of Health Members: Lia Ozols, Chair Stuart Swanson David Johnson Dr. Robert Dietl Mary Brekke Dr. Steve Nelson Lorita Wenzlaff Gilbert Nevius Marian Boehnke Jeanette Lofstrom Joan Pelfrey Anne Kinley City Staff: South Hennepin Human Services Staff: Martin Kirsch, Council Liaison Tom Morgan, Staff Betsy Christensen, Staff Russ Stricker Carol Steinberg South Hennepin Human Services Helen Yates Liaison: The following was the process used for the review I. Special information and data were sent to all members and interested citizens of Richfield: a) Data of surveys done by South Hennepin Human Services for Richfield. b) Data of response from Richfield residents in support for spending tax money on Human Services. c) List of Richfield residents ranking of services needing attention. d) Analysis of Richfield respondents and key informants survey. -3- 0 e) Comments and letters from community representatives. The above surveys and data were reviewed at the April 18, 1983 meeting by Russ Stricker and Carol Steinberg, Staff of South Hennepin Human Services. II. The Advisory Board of Health held a public hearing on April 18, 1983 to receive input from interested residents on the Social Service needs in the community. Public Present: Sue Sarver-identified Day/Child care Betty Carr, President, Richfield League of Women Voters-testified for Day/Child care Rev. Charles Jones-testified for Senior • Citizens Mike Sandahl III. The Richfield Advisory Board of Health established a ranking process based on the following agreed criteria: a) Identify and select five service areas. b) Zero in on the human factor. Based on this criteria, the Advisory Board of Health identified and selected five primary needs that were based on the South Hennepin Human Service Needs Assessment identification. E -d- The following is the five primary needs prioritized and rated'by • the Richfield Advisory Board of Health using a scale of 1 to 10: CHILD/DAY CARE 5 (See enclosed roster of Child Care facilities) IN-HOME SERVICES TO ELDERLY/DISABLED 2 FAMILY VIOLENCE 1 ACCESS TO SERVICES AND INFORMATION 1 CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY/PREVENTION 1 DESCRIPTIONS AND BACKGROUND STATEMENTS OF THE FIVE IDENTIFIED PRIORITIES: (Provided by Russ Stricker, Exccutive Director, South Hennepin Human Services) 1. DAY CARE is the out-of-home care of children in a family or group setting. Day care services also include assistance to parents to locate appropriate child care and the administration of day care programs. Licensed day care services are provided in Richfield by five centers: Richfield Fun Club i (latch-key for school age children), Woodlake Children's Center (pre-school) Little Learner's Preschool, St. Richard's Nursery School, and Woodale Nursery Center, and by approximately sixty group and family day care homes for various ages. Enclosed are the current listings of the licensed day care centers in the South Hennepin area. 2. IN-HOME SERVICES refers to assistance to the elderly to maintain their own homes, such as homemaking and non-personal services, minor repairs, household and outside maintenance, lawn and yard care. The purpose is to provide reasonable cost, quality services which will enable older people to stay in their homes as long as possible. These services are provided in the South Hennepin area through the H.O.M.E. (Household and Outside Maintenance for the Elderly) program of South Hennepin Human Services Council and the Youth Employment Service in Richfield. In 1982, the H.O.M.E. program served over 585 households. More than 150 South Hennepin households received homemaker service. Services provided in 1981-82 to Richfield customers totaled 1,070 hours (approximately 105 customers) and in 1982-83, the first three quarters of the year showed 2,483 hours (approximately 177 customers) of service were provided to Richfield residents. 3. ACCESS TO INFORMATION/COORDINATION OF SERVICES refers to information availa- bility about resources and services in the South Hennepin area, as well as, transportation to these services. Many people are currently served through the South Hennepin County Information and Referral office which has been in this area about ten years. This office had over 4,000 client contacts in the South Hennepin area in 1982 of which about 471 were with Richfield residents. Service needs are: updating the present Mini-Directory of Human Service Services, maintaining and/or increasing Information and Referral Services, education of city and agency staffs as to how to make appropriate referrals, and general publicity about services available. • Coordination of services deals with city and areawide planning to assist in and facilitate cooperation and communication between human service providers, to avoid duplication and overlap of services, to develop services to fit gaps in the service network, and to work to improve existing services. Coordinating of services is done by South Hennepin Human Services Councils in conjunction with city commissions/boards and service agencies in the area. 4., FAMILY VIOLENCE services may involve several areas: - education of the general public as well as public safety departments, referral resources, and human service providers about identifying the problem of family violence and resources for help. - advocacy services to assist victims of family violence in seeking help and in approaching appropriate resources. - provision of temporary shelter through developing a safehome network or a specific shelter. availability of services to assist not only the victims but also the perpetrators of family violence and significant others in facing and coping with this problem. The South Hennepin Family Violence Committee is currently working on supporting existing services, such as self-help groups and on developing additional services, such as a safehomes network and an ongoing advocacy program. This committee is seeking volunteer and financial support to develop needed services for battered women and their families. 5. CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY PREVENTION services refer to education and counseling of children, teenagers and families about development of positive self- esteem/self image and coping skills as well as information about chemical dependency problems. This education and counseling is geared toward avoiding the development or continuance of chemically dependent behavior. In Richfield, these services are provided through Project CHarlie, which is in its 8th year of existence. Project CHarlie focuses on creating chemical dependency awareness in the community and in the schools. 0 -6- • • Based on the rating, CHID/DAY CARE has been considered the most important social service need for consideration at this time. IN-HOME SERVICES TO ELDERLY/DISABLED was considered to be of equal importance but was less critical at this time. The above noted ranking process was approved unanimously by those Board Members in attendance. If the City Council concurs with the Richfield Advisory Board of Health's recommendations, the Council should direct the Community Development Department to solicit specific proposals for the implementation of a social service component of the Community Development Block Grant Program. Such proposals will need to be reviewed for compliance with Federal guidelines established for this program. -7- ^ , 8' J% JU/J SOUTH HENNEPIN CHILD CARE ALL DAY ABC MONTESSORI SCHOOL, INC. 9920 Normandale Boulevard Bloomington, MN 55437 366-2937 2 1/2 - 6 years BABY CARE 8000 Portland Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 884-2323 6 weeks - 15 months BEST FRIENDS DAY CARE CENTER Pond Elementary School 9600 Third Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 884-6319 2 1/2 - 12 years BLOOMINGTON CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER Creekside 9801 Penn Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55431 . 884-3697 2 1/2 - 5 years BL00'IINGTON CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER PO",D SCH00L 9600 Third Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 ?cc ?OnG• UUU- J V 6 :seeks: - ? c years CE`iTR.AL MONTESSORI SCHOOL _ rr -r r !iccilet Avenue South oc7: ncton, MN 55420 ,?4- 3194 2 1/2 - 5 years BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL MONTESSORI (toddler) 8736 Nicollet Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 884-3194 16 months - 30 months BLOOMINGTON WEST MONTESSORI 2501 West 84th Street Bloomington, MN 55420 920-5457 2 1/2 - 6 years BLOOMINGTON WEST MONTESSORI CENTER 2501 West 84th Street Bloomington, MN 55431 920-5457 16 months - 5 years BUILDING BLOCK 8800 Queen Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55431 884-3202 6 weeks - 12 years BUILDING BLOCK - LAKE HARRIET 5720 Emerson Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55419 866-6686 16 months - 5 years CREEKSIDE CHILDREN'S PLACE 4113 West 5th Street Edina, MN 55424 926-1410 2 1/2 - 5 years ESPECIALLY FOR CHILDREN 5505 Doncaster Way Edina, MN 55436 926-4534 16 months - 5 years HAPPY HOURS NURSERY 6508 22nd Avenue South Minneacol s, 55 22 861-13;7 2 1/2 - _: HUGS AND HS=RTS 4439 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 927-8975 6 weeks - 5 years KID'S TIME OUT CREATIVE LEARNING 3240 Southdale Circle Edina, MN 55435 927-9015 24 months - 12 years KINDER CARE LEARNING CENTER =7 7753 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 934-7705 6 weeks - 12 years -8- .?T! ri?tf1E?iiJ CHILD CARE ALL DAY CONT. LEARNING TREE CENTER - Cedar 8800 Cedar Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 854-5905 16 months - 12 years LEARNING TREE CENTER - Nicollet 8101 Nicollet Avenue Bloominaton, MN 55420 884-3000 6 weeks - 5 years LEARNING TREE CENTER - Southwest 5009 Beard Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55410 922-6727 2 1/2 months - 12 years THE LEARNING TREE - West Bloomington 9321 Ensign Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55438 941-9196 16 months - 12 years MARIANA MONTESSORI CHILD CARE CENTER 2501 West 84th Street Bloomington, MN 55431 869-2242 2 1/2 - 5 years •tARIANA MONTESSORI CHILD CARE CENTER 8000 Portland Avenue South Bloominaton, MN 55420 869-2242 2 1/2 - 5 years =.R ;A •IONTESSORI CHILD CENTER u? Bloomington Freeway Bloomington, MN 55420 369-2242 2 1/2 - 5 years MRS. LIISTE'S MONTESSORI SCHOOLS, INC. 8036 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 888-5707 2 1/2 - 5 years NEW HORIZON - Eden Prairie 2228 Eden Prairie Center Eden Prairie, 1N 55344 • 941-1007 16 months - 12 years -2- THE NUTCRACKER SWEET 6716 Gleason Road Edina, MN 55435 944-7559 2 1/2 - 12 years THE NUTCRACKER SWEET - Chapel Hills 6512 Vernon Avenue South Edina, MN 55435 935-3025 2 1/2 - 5 years PLAY & PRAISE CHRISTIAN DAY CARE 10150 Xerxes Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55431 831-1156 6 weeks - 5 years RICHFIELD FUN CLUB 7145 Harriet Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 866-6400 6 - 12 years ST. STEPHEN'S DAY CLUB 4439 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55435 893-3719 6 - 12 years SMILE NURSERY SCHOOL AND DAY CARE CENTER 1501 ',lest 54th Street Mi nneapol i s , 55=119 Xn27-?-, "D 62 6 ee'ks - 5rS ?? ? c,:rr ? e :;mac ina _ .%0-545/ 6 :leeks - 30 months SOUTHDALE MONTESSORI (H & S) 6519 Barrie Road Edina, MN 55435 920-7450 2 1/2 - 6 years SOUTHDALE YMCA DAY CLUB 7355 Ycrk Avenue South Edina, IN 55435 893-3722 summer only 6 - 12 years -9- QOUTH HEiNEPIN CHILD C"RE ALL DAY CONT. -?,- SOUTHDALE YMCA PRESCHOOL 7355 York Avenue South Edina, MN 55435 893-3719 2 1/2 - 5 years WEE CARE DAY CARE CENTER 5501 Chicago Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55417 825-1223 2 1/2 - 5 years WOODLAKE CHILDREN'S CENTER 7525 Oliver Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 866-4346 2 1/2 years - 5 years WOODDALE MONTESSORI 4500 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 925-0406 16 months - 30 months WOODDALE MONTESSORI ACADEMY (H & S) 4500 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 • 925-0406 _ 2 1/2 - 6 years YMCA LATCH-KEY EDEN PRAIRIE 8025 School Road Eden Prairie, 'IN 55344 393-3719 6 - 12 years 116 rl onths - J years 0 _10- 3/30/83 SOUTH HENNEPIN CHILD CARE HALF DAY ABC DAY NURSERY 16515 Luther Way Eden Prairie, MN 55343 941-1310 2 1/2 - 5 years BETTY'S NURSERY SCHOOL 10116 - 2nd Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 888-5915 2 1/2 - 5 years BLOOMINGTON NURSERY SCHOOL 10155 Penn Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55431 881-1449 3 - 5 years CHRISTIAN DAY CHILD CARE, INC. 10150 Xerxes Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55431 831-4789 2 1/2 - 5 years COLONY PARK NURSERY CENTER Colony Park Baptist Church 5532 Wooddale Avenue South Edina, MN 55424 920-4769 2 1/2 - 5 years EDEN PRAIRIE NURSERY SCHOOL 15050 Scenic Heights Road Eden Prairie, MN 55343 941-4092 3 - 5 years GOOD SAMARITAN NURSERY SCHOOL 5730 Grove Edina, MN 55436 929-0049 2 1!2 - 5 years HAND 'N HAND DAY NURSERY 11609 Leona Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 941-8225 2 1/2 - 5 years • HOPE LUTHERAN CHURCH 5712 Cedar Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55423 827-4369 2 1/2 - 5 years NURSERY SCHOOL HOUSE OF PRAYER NURSERY SCHOOL 7625 Chicago Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55423 866-8471 2 1/2 - 5 years LAMB-KIN PLAY GROUP 5440 Penn Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55419 926-2245 16 months - 5 years LITTLE LEARNER'S PRESCHOOL 7145 Harriet Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 866-7976 2 1/2 - 5 years LITTLE PEOPLE'S PRESCHOOL OF EDEN PRAIRIE 7025 Woodland Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55343 937-9286 2 1/2 - 5 years MAYFLOWER WEEKDAY NURSERY SCHOOL 106 East Diamond Lake Road Minneapolis, MN 55419 224-0761 3 - 5 years MARGARET BUTLER'S NURSERY SCHOOL 6817 Antrim Road Edina, MN 55435 944-1620 2 1/2 - 5 years MOUNT HOPE REDEMPTION PREKINDERGARTEN 927 East Old Shakopee Road Bloomington, MN 55420 881-0035y 2 1/2 - 5 years -11- SGUTH HENNEPIN CHILD C?.RE HALF DAY' CONT. MOUNT ZION CHRISTIAN NURSERY SCHOOL 5645 Chicago Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55417 824-1882 2 1/2 - 5 years NORMANDALE NURSERY SCHOOL 6100 Normandale Edina, MN 55436 929-1697 2 1/2 - 5 years ST. EDWARD'S NURSERY SCHOOL 9401 Nesbitt Road Bloomington, MN 55437 831-3272 2 1/2 - 5 years ST. LUKE'S CHRISTIAN NURSERY SCHOOL 1701 West Old Shakopee Road Bloomington, MN 55431 881-5801 2 1/2 - 5 years ST. MICHAEL'S LUTHERAN NURSERY SCHOOL 9201 Normandale Road • Bloomington, MN 55437 831-5276 2 1/2 - 5 years ST. PATRICK'S NURSERY SCHOOL 2829 West 102nd Street Bloomington, MN 55431 881-1855 2 1/2 - 5 years ST. PETER'S LITTLE P SC'DCLHOUSE 5425 France Avenue So ,= Minneapolis, MN 55410 927-6012 3 - 5 years ST. RICHARD'S NURSERY SCHOOL 7540 Penn Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 266-6906 2 1/2 - 5 years SUNSHINE CORNER 4201 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 920-9188 2 1/2 - 5 years WOODDALE NURSERY CENTER 7101 Nicollet Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55423 869-7660 2 1/2 - 5 years -12- CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 173 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Distinguished Citizen Award Later this week, on Saturday, May 28, Clayton LeFevere is being presented with a Distinguished Alumni Award by St. Olaf College. Mr. LeFevere graduated from St. Olaf and subsequently studied law. In February, 1951, Mr. LeFevere was appointed the attorney for the City of Richfield and has continued to hold that important position in our community for thirty-two years. In connection with the Distinguished Alumni Award to be presented to Mr. LeFevere by St. Olaf College, I thought it • would be appropriate to also recognize the long and distinguished service he has provided for the citizens of our community over these past 32 years. Therefore, I am suggesting that Mr. LeFevere be presented with a special Distinguished Citizen Award to compli- ment the Distinguished Alumni Award he will receive on May 28. We have scheduled this award presentation for the first part of the council meeting on May 23. We have also arranged for a brief reception following the award presentation. Mr. LeFevere's family, members of his law firm, and some of his personal friends have been invited to participate in this recognition ceremony. Mr. LeFevere, himself, is unaware of the fact that he will be receiving this award from the City. In considering this matter, it appears to me that no single citizen has contributed as much to the outstanding development of our community as that exemplified by Mr. LeFevere's efforts over the past 32 years. I believe this special Distinguished Citizen Award is an appropriate token of our appreciation to a truly outstanding citizen of our community and long-time member o our city administrative staff. Respectfully submitted, 40 Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja ?'/ 6 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 172 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Appointment of Acting City Manager An item has been listed on the May 23, 1983 city council agenda for the appointment of an acting city manager for the period subsequent to June 17, and before the appointment of a new city manager. Due to the absence of the Mayor from the city, a specific recommendation will be delayed until the council meeting on Monday, May 23, 1983. It is important to appoint an acting city manager soon in order to make the transition more smooth and orderly and allow time for trans- mittal of information. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja cc: Program Directors i ?? O 0 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 171 Agenda May 23, 1983 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richf ield Council Members: Subject: Ordinance Amendment Relating to Cable Line Extension, and Service to Public Buildings. Second Reading. At its meeting of April 25, 1983, the city council approved the second reading of the amendment to the cable line extension provisions of the ordinance. However, publication of the amend- ment was postponed when staff learned of an additional proposed amendment relating to cable service to public buildings. The Cable Commission has now recommended the amendment of Article III, Section 7 of the ordinance, as indicated on pages 2 and 3 of the attachment. This sets out the public buildings to be provided service by Cablesystems free of charge. Public buildings outside the initial service area would be wired at cost. This new provision has no direct effect on Richfield, but relates to a public building in Eden Prairie. All other provisions are the same as those considered on April 25. The city attorney has advised that the council may consider the second reading again with the new provision since publication of the earlier amendment has not occurred. However, a new public hearing is not required. It is recommended that the city council approve the second reading of the ordinance as proposed. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/ ej a 0 ORDINANCE NO. 2', 0 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. SETTING FORTH A DESCRIPTION OF THE FACILITIES TO BE PROVIDED BY GRANTEE; MODIFYING THE INITIAL SERVICE AREA; AMENDING THE LINE EXTENSION POLICY OF GRANTEE; PRESCRIBING INSTALLATIONS CHARGES AS SET FORTH HEREIN; AND AMENDING THE EXHIBITS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That Article I, Section 2, of ordinance No. be amended to read as follows: V. "Public Building" is any building owned or operated r ? by the United States government or any subdivision thereof, or the state of Minnesota or any subdivision thereof, or the City or any other governmental subdivision, or school district or educational institutions. SECTION 2. That Article III, Section 4, of said Ordinance be amended to read as follows: SECTION 4. FACILITIES. The Grantee shall construct, maintain and continue to provide • all facilities and equipment set forth in the Offering or as otherwise provided in Article V, Section 2 and Exhibits A and B hereto, including, but not limited, to, the headend, hubs, distribution system, studios, equipment and other facilities. Grantee's plan, as set forth in the Offering, for implementing the construction, utilization and maintenance of these facili- -1- • • SECTION 2. MODIFICATION OF INITIAL SERVICE AREA; EXPANSION OF SERVICE AREA; AND LINE EXTENSION POLICY. A. Service will be provided to dwelling and nonresi- dential units of the City in areas with an average density less than forty (40) dwelling units per street mile or cable mile whichever, as determined by City, provides the greater benefit to the subscribers, (the "extended area"), and not within the Initial Service Area, upon payment of an installa- tion charge based upon the cost contribution formula defined r1 -3- • within the extended area. 2. The standard cost per dwelling and nonresi- dential unit in the extended area shall be determined by dividing the total from (1) above by 40, being the standard minimum dwelling unit density. 3. Grantee's contribution to the cost of the line extension shall be determined by dividing the total number of dwelling and nonresidential units in the extended area, as designated by the City Council pur- suant to Section 2.C.(2) below, by the number of cable miles or street miles in the extended area whichever, as determined by City, produces the greater benefit to the subscribers, and multiplying the resulting number by the standard cost per dwelling unit. 4. The difference between the total costs at (1) above and the Grantee's contribution at (3) above is the total contribution of the dwelling and nonresiden- tial units in the extended area. 5. The installation charge to be paid by each subscriber shall be determined by dividing the total contribution of the dwelling and nonresidential units from (4) above by the number of dwelling and nonresi- dential units whose occupants joined in the petition pursuant to Section 2.C.(1) hereof. C. Extended areas shall be established and service r? 'u -5- 9 the installation charge estimate by U.S. mail. 5. Occupants within the extended area who wish to become subscribers will have thirty (30) days after mailing of such notice to commit to service, by execu- ting and submitting a commitment form to Grantee. The commitment form shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the City prior to its use by .Cra.ntee. 6. Occupants within the same thirty (30) day period shall deposit the amount of the installation charge estimate into an escrow account to be main- tained by the City. If the number of occupants who deposit the installation charge estimate within such thirty (30) day period is less than the number who join in the petition (and the aggregate deposit made by such occupants is less than the total contribution of dwelling and nonresidential units required by Section 2.C.7.), Grantee shall, within ten (10) days after the end of the thirty (30) day period, notify in writing by U. S. mail such depositing occupants of the deficiency in the escrow account, such occupants may make addi- tional deposits within ten (10) days of mailing of such notice. 7. If the total contribution of dwelling and nonresidential units as determined by Section 2.8.4. is deposited within the time period specified in C.6 • -7- 0 paragraphs (5) and (6) above and who wishes to 'nook up to the line extension within the first three (3) years after service is commenced in the extended area must deposit into an escrow account to be maintained by the City the amount of the installation charge estimate deposited by original subscribers under paragraph 4 above and adjusted in accordance with paragraph 8 above. All such new contributions shall be held in escrow until the end of the third year after service is com- menced in the extended area, at which time all funds in escrow shall be divided equally and returned to the then current subscribers. At the end of the three (3) years following the commencement of service to the extended area, all sub- sequent subscribers in the extended area shall be charged the same installation charge as other subscribers who are in areas with an average density of at least forty (40) dwelling units per street mile or cable mile. D. Nonresidential units and public buildings in an area not within the Initial Service Area or an extended area shall be provided service upon acceptance of a quote from Grantee. The quote shall not exceed the cost to Grantee, calculated on a time and material basis, of extend- ing the cable and necessary cable equipment to service said • -9- i Amended Exhibit A - The heading of Exhibit A is amend to read as follows: Map of Construction by Area, Including Time Schedule and Initial Service Area. Amended Exhibit B - Rate Schedule (see Section (7) of this amending Ordinance for the amendment to Exhibit B) SECTION 7. That Exhibit B of said Ordinance be amended by deleting Article I, Section A, paragraph 5. SECTION 8. That notwithstanding any other provision of this Ordinance, if less than all of the other of the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield offer a similar franchise Ordinance amendment to Grantee, which is accepted by 0 Grantee, Grantee or City may cancel this franchise Ordinance amendment and all of their obligations hereunder by written notice given to the other not later than thirty (30) days after all the other of said Cities shall have formally acted upon their respective similar franchise Ordinance amendments; provided, that if Grantee elects to cancel this franchise Ordinance amendment pursuant hereto, it must also cancel all other franchise Ordinance amendments granted to it by the other of said Cities effective simultaneously herewith. SECTION 9. Grantee shall have thirty (30) days from the last date of adoption of a similar franchise Ordinance amendment by all of the Cities listed in Section 8 of this Ordinance, to r? -11-